linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] Revert "task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee"

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 9 Sep 2015 09:17:17 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Revert "task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee"

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Again, rightly or not I believe that FIFO makes task_work_add() more useful.
> Perhaps I am wrong, so far I can only provide the artificial examples...

I'd rather wait until somebody has a real use case. I hate adding
infrastructure for "what if.." scenarios. We're better off if we can
make do with minimal semantics (ie "there are no guarantees except
that the work will be done before returning to user space") than with
stronger semantics that people then perhaps start depending on even if
they didn't really need them.

                  Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/